http://myselfthink.live archer price in india Constitution

Epic montage of Obama promising we can keep our plans in one video. Anderson Cooper smacking the administration down in another

http://herofeet.live ohne therapeutin zurechtkommen

sauce type and derivative Anderson Cooper covering how the administration is telling the insurance industry to keep quiet

schwanger trotz mirena

John Wayne in 1975 on Liberals

tv sehen online visit The more things change, the more they stay the same. It is John Wayne, so the language could be a little better

vinschgau mit bur reisen

Nancy Pelosi Says Obamacare Law is About “The Liberation of People To A Life of Liberty, Freedom”

entfernen lackfarbe auf plastikfenster view These people  claim tea party patriots are terrorists, racists, and want to take the U.S. back to the confederacy. All the while out of the other side of their mouth, saying we need civility in government.  I wanted to call her names as well, yet I am refraining, because I do want to be civil. I still do not understand how forcing someone to buy a product from a private company, (or pay a fine) is liberty, or freedom. What if I do not want to buy it, what if even with subsidies it is too expensive, what if I want to keep my old plan which is no longer available ? (if you like your plan you can keep it) How much tyranny do we allow?

restaurant les quatre assiettes smarves  

http://luckcamp.live/2019/05 vitesse tir ballon handball

Cancer treatments, CDC, and others shutdown? Heck Yes! Cookie monster? Why No, of Course

ba ignou solved assignment 2016 2017 When the National Institutes of Health funding was cut off. It became a big story when the shutdown started. We have seen park rangers saying they have been told to make this shutdown as difficult as possible. We have seen private citizens removed from their homes. Yet in all this we must make sure 445 million dollars are delivered to the liberal sandbox that is PBS on the first day of the shutdown.

gibt dir das leben eine zitrone Link to treasury report

filzstift doppelspitze paradise 001 Listening to these people cheer for her non-answers is sad.

http://historylawyer.live/2019/04 wasserfallsteig bad urach karte

ball pvt ltd

http://dyingmission.live/2019/04 therian saga dressage

James Madison On Firearms

brésil rio 94% solution From Federalist #46

The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

The argument under the present head may be put into a very concise form, which appears altogether conclusive. Either the mode in which the federal government is to be constructed will render it sufficiently dependent on the people, or it will not. On the first supposition, it will be restrained by that dependence from forming schemes obnoxious to their constituents. On the other supposition, it will not possess the confidence of the people, and its schemes of usurpation will be easily defeated by the State governments, who will be supported by the people.

On summing up the considerations stated in this and the last paper, they seem to amount to the most convincing evidence, that the powers proposed to be lodged in the federal government are as little formidable to those reserved to the individual States, as they are indispensably necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Union; and that all those alarms which have been sounded, of a meditated and consequential annihilation of the State governments, must, on the most favorable interpretation, be ascribed to the chimerical fears of the authors of them.

“Feinstein: We cannot allow the rights of a few to override safety of all” This woman is treasonous

Dianne Feinstain and her fellow signers of the Declaration of Treason:

Mr. SCHUMER,
Mr. DURBIN,
Mr. WHITEHOUSE,
Mr. BLUMENTHAL,
Mr. LEVIN,
Mr. ROCKEFELLER,
Ms. MIKULSKI,
Mrs. BOXER,
Mr. REED,
Mr. LAUTENBERG,
Mr. “PedoBear” MENENDEZ, Mr. CARDIN,
Mrs. GILLIBRAND,
Mr. SCHATZ,
Mr. MURPHY,
Ms. WARREN,
Mr. CARPER

   S. 150. A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. This legislation is urgently needed to help end the mass shootings that have devastated countless families and that lead too many Americans to live their lives in fear.

**snip** It will be an uphill battle–all the way. I know this.

But we need to ask ourselves:

Do we let the gun industry take over and dictate policy to this country? Do we let those who profit from increasing sales of these military style-weapons prevent us from taking commonsense steps to stop the carnage?

Or should we empower our elected representatives to vote their conscience based on their experience, based on their sense of right and wrong and based on their need to protect their schools, their malls, their workplaces and their businesses?

This legislation is my life’s goal. As long as I am a member of the Senate, I will work night and day to pass this bill into law. No matter how long it takes, I will fight until assault weapons are taken off our streets.

Put simply, we cannot allow the rights of a few to override the safety of all. That is not the America that our founding fathers envisioned. And that is not the America I want my children and grandchildren to live in.

So I ask everyone watching at home: please get involved and stay involved.

The success or failure of this bill depends not on me, but on you. If the American people rise up and demand action from their elected officials, we will be victorious. If the American people say “no” to military-style assault weapons, we will rid our Nation of this scourge.

Please, talk to your senator and your member of Congress.

SenFeinstein

 

She is right contact your member of congress and ask them what part of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” do they not understand

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2013-01-24/pdf/CREC-2013-01-24-pt1-PgS291.pdf#page=1

Quote of the day

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” –Patrick Henry